IN THE REGION | NEW JERSEY; A Slower Pace in Teardowns

By ANTOINETTE MARTIN

Published: November 9, 2008

CORRECTION APPENDED

NO. 1 Teardown State. That has been New Jersey's ranking from the National Trust for Historic Preservation each year since 2002, when the trust began keeping track of how many older houses in historic neighborhoods were being demolished to make way for new and often bigger houses. In August, the trust cited 85 communities -- from Alpine to Fair Lawn; from Morristown to Wykoff -- where teardowns were heavily concentrated.

But since then, another trend has become a lot more noticeable -- even in New Jersey. The overall economic situation and the sorry state of the housing market mean that fewer and fewer people are ''throwing away perfectly good houses,'' as one preservation-minded architect from Point Pleasant, Verity L. Frizzell, put it.

Ms. Frizzell said she had closely observed an instance in nearby Bay Head a few years ago in which a carefully restored Victorian was sold, demolished and replaced. ''That upset a lot of people,'' she said, ''and there was a big push for a moratorium on teardowns there.'' But some residents argued that ''it would be taking away from their property value, and the zoning change was ultimately defeated.''

''Now,'' Ms. Frizzell said in a cheerful tone, ''the point is probably moot.'' Since the beginning of the year, she added, she and half a dozen other Monmouth and Ocean County architects whom she informally surveyed by telephone have seen a decline of roughly 15 percent in the inquiries they receive about ''teardown and build'' projects.

''Just six months ago,'' said Stacey Ruhle Kleisch, who is president-elect of the American Institute of Architects' New Jersey chapter, ''it was 'the sky's the limit' with my clientele. Whenever possible, it was, 'Tear it down, and make something new.' ''

But that is definitely ''grinding to a halt,'' said Ms. Kleisch, whose firm GK&A Architects is based in Rutherford. ''Now, it's, 'Let's see what choices we can make to save money, immediately, and over the life cycle of a home.' ''

''Whether it is economic issues, tax issues or, in a few cases, stricter zoning restrictions,'' Ms. Kleisch added, ''this is one point where some negative pressures are giving a positive result.''

James Foerst is a Westfield town councilman who based his first run for office in 2003 on a pledge to slow down the pace of teardowns. He said he believed that tightening local limits on the permitted height and size of new houses three years ago had made some difference.

Even so, he said, the number of teardowns did not peak in Westfield until last year, when there were around 80.

''This year,'' Mr. Foerst added, ''we still have some. But I'll be surprised if it reaches 30.''

It is certainly not as if the bulldozers had gone quiet around the state. Last summer, for instance, a frayed but once-grand 1910 colonial on Park Street in Montclair went down abruptly after a developer bought it. The new colonial now under construction -- at 4,200 square feet, slightly smaller than the old house, but outfitted with a full array of modern technological conveniences -- is being marketed by Rhodes, Van Note & Company for $1.85 million.

Joseph Feltz, who builds homes in the wealthy shoreline towns of Deal and Elberon, says that while the pace of teardowns is off by half in those two communities, he personally has done five projects involving teardowns this year.

Mr. Feltz says many of his clients are Hasidic Jews who prefer to pay cash, aren't particularly affected by stock market gyrations, and require new, large homes to accommodate family gatherings. ''Everyone wants two things, and I've seen no change in that,'' he said. ''They want a lot as close to the shore as possible, and a big modern house with 5,000 square feet.''

Peter Primavera, a vice chairman of the Urban Land Institute in New Jersey, says that although he perceives a lull in teardown activity, that does not translate into a halt.

''When the stock market is up,'' Mr. Primavera said, ''old houses go down. Now, things are bad on Wall Street and fewer houses are being taken down. But the overall dynamic is still in place of people wanting to build new, big McMansions when they have the money to do so.''

Mr. Primavera pointed out that there tended to be less restriction on teardown activity in poorer urban areas, where the populace and public officials can be overburdened with keeping streets safe and similar issues, and where there is a lack of resources to focus on the loss of older housing stock.

But he did note the exception of Newark, where the administration if Mayor Cory A. Booker has recently emphasized that preserving and rehabilitating old buildings -- or even just parts of them, like a stone facade -- should be a factor in redevelopment projects.

Similarly, John Hatch, a partner in the architecture firm of Clarke Caton Hintz, held up the example of rehab work going on now at various factory buildings in downtown Trenton.

A number of boarded-up factories are being converted into stylish condominiums, under the aegis of federal housing programs that subsidize mortgages for low- and moderate-income buyers. But the process is respectful of their architectural integrity and ''recycles'' the buildings, rather than destroying them, he said.

PHOTO: UNDER CONSTRUCTION: Architects around New Jersey report a drop in inquiries related to demolitions. But there are exceptions, like this house on Park Street in Montclair, going up on the site of a recent teardown. (PHOTOGRAPH BY AARON HOUSTON FOR THE NEW YORK TIMES)

Correction: November 16, 2008, Sunday
The ''In the Region'' article in New Jersey copies last Sunday, about a decline in the pace of ''tear down and build'' projects in the state, rendered incorrectly the name of a borough cited as among 85 communities where teardowns are prominent. It is Fair Lawn, not Fairlawn. The article also misidentified the real estate agency that is marketing a new home being built on Park Street in Montclair. It is Rhodes, Van Note & Company, not Re/Max.